Hi, after a few years building kits of beautiful aircraft I thought I'd build something ugly that wallows in mud so I started an Italeri 1/35 M4A1. The hull is the cast type so I thought the surface needed some texture. My questions are should I do the same to the turret? Also would it be correct to put a standard 75mm turret on in place of the kit one? I've found a Tamiya turret that was stored away for a few years and it would seem more aesthetically pleasing if I could use it instead of the ugly kit 76mm turret. Hope someone can help me out on this. Here's a pic of the hull texturing I've done so far.

The 75mm turret would produce a standard M4A1 75mm tank so no problems so far as I know, certainly a minor conversion that I've used before. The turret is also a casting so it's up to you whether you texture it as well, I don't bother to redo the hull or turret but if you're doing one......................

hi martin,

the hull and turret should both exhibit some cast texture, but go easy on it.
US armour castings were of excellent quality, and a lot smoother than most.

you could use the 75mm turret on the italeri hull, but aparently the version produced was quite rare. most were used for DD tanks. however i do have a picture of one fording a river in the pacific. luzon if i remeber correctly, so it should be fine.

cheers

joe

Thanks guys, the tamiya turret already has some cast texture on it so that saves me a job. :-) I would assume that after the initial landings the skirts and extras of the DD tanks would have been removed to enable them to act as gun tanks?

I beleive that M4A175s were landed on D-day with US troops, I'm sure that I've seen pics of them with wading gear, and a Steve Zaloga article & dio in Military Modelling.

maost of the skirts were removed, but they did still retain a promenant rail around the hull for a while, as well as various other fittings





heres a few pics to show what i mean

cheers

joe

dave,

i think the ones landed with wading gear were small hatch M4A1's, earlier production models

cheers

joe

One question Brandydoguk are you depicting this model as in back in the 40's or are you doing a museum piece, cause if your making it look just like the museum piece then you hit it right on the head. I believe, but if you want it to look like it was back in the 40's, then it was a lot cleaner then, as Great Brit said it has 60 years of weathering on that museum piece.
The US done a pretty good job on their casting back then, that Russia was the one that had really rough castings. Hope this helps

Kerry

I have several photos of ex-DD M4A1's and they are clearly the ones with the large hatch and the 75mm turret. They're configured for fighting as several of them are mounted w/Culin/Rhino hedge prongs. They have odd fittings not removed but the main hull bracket has been removed in these photos.

I'm building this one set in the 40s so I guess I will have to sand the texturing back a bit.
I didn't realise there were so many variants of the sherman, the only ones I've built before were the Tamiya M4A3 OOB and a Dragon Firefly which I've learned is very inaccurate regarding lower hull dimensions.

I built this kit OOB and I really didnt notice anythingwrong with the turret .Can you guys tell me the errors so I will know next time.Also I always wanted to know what was the 76mm gun on this kit called and does it have the power as the 76mm with the muzzle brake.Also the tip had something of a muzzle brake or was it the counter weight I keep hearing about on shermans.Sorry for the ignorant questions but I like these tanks but man did they have some work on them,I can just imagine the german tanks and how hard it is to get them accurate.I have the book British and American tanks of WW2 its great but I need more focus on the sherman.


Thanx,
AJ

There's nothing wrong with the 76mm turret, just that not too many of them where used in combat during WW2, so for many people the 75mm with it's original turret shape is the way to go.